tv Consider This Al Jazeera January 25, 2015 12:00am-1:01am EST
>> a state of the union full of swagger, but was it realistic? two key house members join us. >> the man who published controversial cartoons of the prophet mohammed in denmark joins us, still facing assassination threats from terrorists a decade later. >> the deadly fight to keep mountain gore relevant las from extinction. welcome to "consider this. those and more stories, straight ahead. >> the shadow of cries has passed. >> president obama provided democratic witness a roadmap. >> during the state of the union address -- >> these aren't just the wrong policies, they're the
wrong priorities. >> the president was confident.
>> i have no more campaign to say run. i know because i won both of them. >> the u.s. is holding its highest level talk with cuba in 35 years.
>> american's immigration policy vowing to allow cubans who reach the shores to remain in the country. >> if it falls, what is safe on our planet that can be protected? >> the number of women murdered are rising fast. >> they are stunned to little or nothing is done to bring the killers to justice. >> there are times when the freedom of speech is under assault. >> for the pen to be mightier than the sword you need more. >> president obama is taking his
economic proposals to the heart land. >> will we accept an
economy where only a few of us do spectacularly well or commit our receivers to an economy that generates rising in comes and chance for everyone who makes the effort? >> the president's trip to red states idaho and kansas only underscored the irony for a skeptical republican-led congress, which has repeatedly said tax increases on the wealthy are a non-starter. >> but he owes it to the american people to find a serious way to work with the representatives that they elected. there's not a lot of serious lawmakers can do with talking points designed specifically not to pass. >> there's no sign the endless squabble will stop anytime soon. house speaker john boehner said wednesday he invited prime minister benjamin netanyahu of israel to speak before a joint session of congress next month blindsiding the white house, which called the move a
departure from protocol. speaker boehner disagreed. >> i did not consult with the white house. the congress can make this decision on its own. i don't believe i'm poking anyone in the eye. there is a serious threat that exists in the world and the president last night kind of papered over it. >> as the speaker said, critics argued this
president glossed over the rising threat of terrorism and presented in general an overly rosy picture of his domestic agenda. >> this is good news, people. >> for more, we're joined by democratic congress wham january is janschakowsky. we're also joined by democratic congress mapp luis gutierrez representing illinois' four district. he will visit a dozen city to
say educate about the president's broader stance off immigration. >> you never would have known that there is as big win by republicans in november. the president himself said after his own win in 2012 that elections have consequence. congresswoman, is there a bit of denial there, seeing the laundry list of things he laid out that republicans don't like. >> one of the consequences is that the president is unleashed to offer the kinds of proposals that i think the middle class really wants to hear, to wash back, to walk believe an economy from the middle out. i think it's resonating with the american people. we saw some overnight polling and focus groups. his numbers have gone up and there's a lot of support for the kinds of things he was talking about yesterday, to help the middle class survive and thrive.
>> talking about unleashed -- i'll get to you right now, congressman. much is made about the tone the president took, the l.a. times described him as boastful, confident, even cocky, the guardian remarked on his swagger. last week, we discussed on this show how some of the gop's first actions after taking control of both houses did not bode well for bipartisanship because they focused on passing things they know the president will veto. wasn't the president the flip side of the coin last night, seemingly encouraging bipartisanship it. >> seems to me the republicans are fighting the last war they continued to fight on immigration when i think that battle is over, most americans support that and should move forward. they continue to want to undo the affordable care act, obamacare, and they are continuing a war on women, even as we speak today. so i think the republicans are off base.
>> congressman, i wanted to get your reaction to the question. >> i thought the president was confident, looking towards the future. i didn't see a president with recriminations. actually, he went up to the woman and the family that was sitting next to the first lady and said it was hard working americans like them and used them as an example of kind of all of americans picking themselves up by their boot straps and saying that's the way we should do it. i heard a president say let's stop pointing fingers at each other, and kind of saying no before we even finish the sentence. why don't we listen to each other. i kind of heard a president that was confident, but kind of turned the page, wasn't looking to the past, kind of -- >> how is that received by your colleagues across the aisle? >> oh, really well. i got to tell you, i took out my calculator during the speech and
took $174,000, what a member of congress earned in a year and realized the congress will not raise the minimum wage yet we earn in one month what we expect someone to live on in a whole year. he brought that out in a very positive manager. every time they have a referendum in any state where they put increasing the minimum wage on, it won resoundingly even in republican states like arkansas. >> that's why i think that -- >> i want to -- go ahead. >> i was just going to say, it was like they were super glued to their seats and hands tied. you did not see the republicans get up and clap or show any kind of approval, even when the president was talking about the good news of our economy. it was like they were not able to move. >> worries people on a lot of issues.
let's talk about the economy. the president focused on taxing the rich. congresswoman, introduced the fairness in taxation act, adding higher tam brackets for bigger earners. do you hope to get support across the aisle and would that be a drop in the bucket when it comes to the national debt. >> $800 billion is a significant amount of money. i have support from many millionaires and multi-millionaires who think they out a pay their share. why should tax brackets stop there when so much money has
gone to the very, very wealthy in our country, the top 1%. the tax brackets i have at 45% at $1 million and going up to 49% at a billion dollars, people do earn a billion dollars, there are some. >> there are some who do, yet. >> there are and that's still lower than the tax rates through most of the reagan administration, the top tax rate. i think we ought to update our tax code. >> what the other side would argue is the treasury revenues are at record high, so is the problem taxation or spending? spending? >> i've heard paul ryan be pretty optimistic. he looks forward to working with the president. i voted against the north american free trade agreement in
1993 under bill clinton. i hit to it was a bad proposal. you know what? the president i think hit hit the right chord. he said there have to be fair trade agreements, protect the american people and there was applause, and guess what? paul ryan was talking about since he's going to be chairman of the ways and means committee company, all trade has got to go through, just helping people raise their kids and giving tax credits, there are going to be avenues. >> to find some agreement. >> very popular, yeah, look, antonio, i think many of the things the president spoke to are american values that the american people support. i mean, if everything we do is saying what would be republicans agree to, lets not have a two party system. this is about challenging one another, so lets challenge. >> let's talk about immigration. the president didn't say much about that in the state of union. republicans are continue to go
threaten cutting funding on homeland security that would stop to some extent some of the president's executive action on immigration. there are reports, congressman that the department of home land security isn't ready to process the millions of additional immigrants that the action would allow to get work permits and deferred action, because the system is just overburdened. are you concerned? >> well, look, absolutely we're always concerned about every application that is made before the federal government. i have complete confidence in the secretary of homeland security, in mr. johnson's ability to get this done. let's remember, he ran, he was second in command and did the oh, don't ask, don't tell review and change and implementation over at the department of justice. he knows what it is to make systemic changes and he'll make that systemic change now over at homeland security. let me sage. you know what?
i heard that, antonio, from other people, the president didn't speak, but he spoke to loudly on november 20 at the -- i mean it's still being echoing throughout our community. we had a wonderful event, full house, providence, rhode island, we had a full house in new jersey on friday. i'm going to charlotte and charleston and january and i are going to have an activity in this wonderful catholic church in her neck of the woods. >> on valentine's day. >> you can imagine. >> illinois folks hanging together. all right. >> saturday, it's going to be valentine's and we're going to be sharing the love of this congress and the president. we have to sign up 5 million people. >> terrorism is something else the president didn't speak much about. it was contrasted the way the president spoke about domestic
issues and the way he spoke about terrorism. is there a disconnect that attention that many people have on terrorism and the way the president addressed it last night? >> i would say there's a disconnect with the republicans. you know, i really resent the fact that the republicans may be critical of the president on foreign policy and on terrorism, and they are the ones that are holding up adequate funding for the department of homeland security, even after paris. we had a vote, and they had the nerve to attach these poison pills of anti immigrant amendments on to the department of homeland security. i think the president talked a wise and measured and thoughtful foreign policy, and he did ask the congress to come together and to fund this effort against isis. he didn't go into great elaboration, but i think the president has conducted a thoughtful foreign policy and
right now, the republicans won't even let us have an adequate homeland security bill. >> antonio, unless we're going to send 100,000 young men and women into the battlefield, sometimes they're just not happy. i remember when george bush said not that important to get osama bin laden. barack obama got osama bin laden. remember when the president said it was over. every time i think about sadaam hussein, he was against al-qaeda and buffer against iran. now because of our military intervention, you got isis because of that intervention and iran stronger than ever. >> you get the argument that isil is a result of the civil war in syria and pulling all our troops out of iraq, but let's not get into that debate because i want to ask you
controversy over john boehner inviting israeli prime benjamin netanyahu to speak before congress. what is your reaction? >> israel is our great ally in the middle east. i think it is awkward just a short time before the presidential election in israel, which is going to be happening in march and while we have before the house some important discussions about how we address the negotiation with iran to prevent iran from having a nuclear weapon, so i think there is a certain amount of politics in this invitation, although you know, we certainly do want to have a continue to have a bipartisan close relationship with the state of israel. >> i don't know that it is going to serve the best purposes of achieving peace and reconciliation in the
israeli-palestinian conflict. i've always been for a two state solution. i want everyone in israel to live in peace and security, but i also want a free democratic prosperous palestinian state where they can have a nation too. i think that is the road to how would i say democracy and freedom and justice. i don't know that just before an election, an election, right, in which this could play an important part, we want to have it somebody just before the election. really? i don't know. look, just because you might not think netanyahu shouldn't come and speak and this might not be an appropriate time, doesn't have any indication about your if i had he willty to the cause of peace between israel and the palestinians and reaching a peaceful solution. >> thank you for being with us. "consider this" will be right back.
>> every monday night, al jazeera america brings you controversial... >> we have to change those things in order to make our own lives better. >> entertaining... >> there was a lot of laughter. >> thought provoking... >> it doesn't change the world but it does influence the way people think. >> surprising... >> no edits! >> exclusive one on one interviews with the most interesting people of our time. >> if you have an agenda with people, you sometimes don't see the truth. >> conversations you won't find anywhere else. "talk to al jazeera". monday 10:30 eastern. only on al jazeera america. >> it's a chilling and draconian sentence... it simply cannot stand. >> its disgraceful... the only crime they really committed is journalism... >> they are truth seekers... >> all they really wanna do is find out what's happening, so they can tell people... >> governments around the world all united to condemn this... >> as you can see, it's still a very much volatile
europe is still reeling from the massacre of 12 people at the headquarters of charlie hebdo. the newspaper published cartoons of the muslim prophet mohammed sparking a backlash from extremists. our next guest could have met that same fate. a dozen cartoons of muhammed were commissioned after illustrators couldn't be found for fear of upsetting muslims. he outlines experiences and the death threats he still faces in his back, the tyranny of silence. we sat down with him for a new edition of talk to al jazeera. it began with his initial reaction to the massacre of charlie hebdo staffers in paris. >> i was shocked. i was grieving, because i knew some of these people but was not surprised. in 2006, i was shocked and
surprised, and it seemed very unreal, so i couldn't relate it in a serious way, but this time, it hit me very hard, because it couldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has been following events over the past nine years. >> you are on the same al-qaeda hit list and inspire magazine as was the editor of charlie hebdo, as is salomon rushdie. what is it like worrying about this constant threat? >> i try not to if he can cuss on it and i put a lot of effort into doing exactly the same as i would have done without being on this list, because if i start to change the way i live my life and what i do and what i believe in, then i would hand those who would like to come after me a victory, and i don't want to do that. >> let's go back a decade when
you were thinking about publishing these cartoons of the prophet mohammed. you wrote in your new book, i have become a figure many love to hate. some would like to see me dead. i do not see conflict or its own sake, but have been branded as a careless trouble maker who pays no heed to the consequences of your actions. you ask yourself the question, was there censorship, would there be this kind of violence. you didn't expect to see the kind of violence that would kill hundreds of people? >> of course not. even experts on islam were telling me that this would never turn into an international scandal. it's a rationalization after the fact to say you should ever known. >> there were people in denmark concerned bit and who were worried that you were making the country a target back then.
>> only after -- >> violence? >> yes. >> there is a change in the attitude than back then. >> absolutely. back in 2006, 49% of the danish population said it was the wrong thing to publish those cartoons. today, 65% says it was the right thing to do and only 17% say it was the wrong thing to do, so you have seen a sea change in the attitude to the publication of the cartoons after what happened in paris, and you cannot say that that cartoon is saying something about every muslim, like you cannot say if you depict carl marx with blood on his hands that every marxist is a killer. >> let's talk about whether
there are double standards in all of this. in charlie hebdo's case, they fired a cartoonist at one point, because he drew something that was critical of nicholas sarkozy, then the french president's son getting married to a jewish woman an this was deem to be antisemitic, so is there a double standard, this guy gets fired for that, but there's no problem publishing cartoons that are seen as making fun of the prophet mohammed. >> there is as double standard and i think that is a problem, though i will say this. i do not think that mashing a religious doctrine is the same as mocking the memory of 6 million people killed during a second world war. france does have hate speech laws and among them, holocaust denial is a criminal offense. i have for a long time spoken out against those laws. i do think we have to get rid of
hate speech laws in europe and it's given some muslims a reason for accusing france of exercising double standard. on the one hand, how is it possible that charlie hebdo can do what they are doing being taken to court and then you have a french comedian who is saying something that some people perceive as anti semitic and is taken to court and convicted. >> what do you say to pope francis, who just recently said you cannot provoke, you cannot insult the faith of others, you cannot make fun of the faith of others. he's arguing, you know, that there should be some limits to free speech and mocking muhammed is seen as a terrible insult by many muslims. >> i think that the pope, who is sharing a church responsible for the inquisition in europe should be very careful to talk about the right of answer mocking with
violence. >> that was 500 years ago. >> is there such a thing as appropriate self sensorship where we as journalists can make the certain decision to say well, certain things shouldn't be put out there and if you look at what's happened with the cartoons, most american news outlets have not shown what charlie hebdo has published, including this one and your book in the united states, the publication does not have the cartoons that you published in denmark. >> of course every editor has a right to exercise his editorial line. what i'm skeptical about is moat veils. we did not republic labor charlie hebdo's cartoons in my newspaper and wrote an editorial saying violence works, because that was not a journalistic judgment, it was a security judgment, and i think that
there's been confusion among editors both in western europe and here about what's the real motivation, is it because you want to be nice or is it because of fear, and i mean, publication does not mean endorsement. i think that in a democracy, you have many rights. you have a right to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, but the only right you should not have in a democracy is a right not to be offended, that we -- the price we pay for living in a liberal democracy that is from time to time, people may publish or say something that we may find offensive, so we need to grow thicker skins, and maybe instead of sending people in sense activity train, they say something offensive, we should all be sent to insensitivity training. >> you actually said talking about freedom of expression that what you were doing was not so
much strike ago blow for free speech, it was battling self censorship. did you succeed or are you a decade later saying that in fact people are censoring them receivers even more. >> i'm not an activist. i am an editor an journalist. for me, it is to raise the issues, it's not for me to win this battle, of course, but i think we have -- we succeeded in focusing on a very serious problem, and nine years later the problem has not gone away, in fact, it's gotten worse. >> are we losing that battle? >> i don't know. it depends on what you and i will do in our daily work and the kind of editorial decisions we are making. it will democrat and whether people will support the right to freedom of expression or not out there, so it's a question of how individuals will react to this.
it's not predetermined how this will play out, but i will say that i i am more optimistic today. >> almost four years ago, the people of egypt rhodes against the decades of hosni mubarak in the arab spring. it began with thousands marching through downtown cairo to tahrir square, call for mubarak to step down, which he finally did after days of protests that often turned violent. four years and three regimes later, life is largely unchanged.
your book chronicles everything that happened in tahrir square mostly through the eyes of two gyp--egyptians. you have two very different people, both inspired by the arab spring in tahrir square. they both represent an important way of looking at life in egypt. the question is could they ever come together, the secularist and the islamist. >> the sad story is how they almost did and broke apart with bitterness and recrimination. i followed a dozen activists from the beginning of tahrir in my the sort of defeat of the revolution. i chose to focus on these two once i saw how it ended up
because they did embody this struggle to bridge a really deep social divide and political failure to do so. >> that's really a conflict that exists daily. >> it happened on two levels. one, the government has really manipulated this idea of religion to be part of it. in their daily life, they don't trust each other, they don't get along. >> so tahrir square happens, mubarak gets deposed, leads to democratic elections the muslim brotherhood gets elected. the brotherhood then ended up ruling in similar ways to the military. they took a similar patronizing attitude towards egyptian. the government functions with the idea that people needed guidance, needed to be controlled or else they'd be
unable to care for themselves and that has led to one authoritarian regime after another. >> the idea is people are sheep, you can do with them what you want and the muslim brotherhood came into power. once they had their hands on the levers, they just acted like another mubarak. they wanted to take as much of that power for themselves. a lot of revolutionaries can't trust people from a muslim brotherhood background anymore. >> that leads to the military taking matters in its own hands again, opposing the muslim brotherhood. you write the old regime is back in power with a new and more ruthless leader that takes revenge against the revolutionary that is challenged it. they are talks about a new constitution that talks about of democracy also part of the dialogue in egypt.
have things gotten better? >> things have gotten worse. we can't forgot that must be remember and the tie rants like him always ruled with high quality constitutions that they ignored and rhetoric of democracy and inclusiveness. we have to look at where the record is in the 40,000 people in prison for demonstrating and the actual lack of free speech if it's critical against the regime to see how bad things ever gotten. >> that's led to all sorts of people imprisoned. there are certainly tremendous repression. you said it is much worse than under mubarak? >> right sadly, we see people like the character in my book who put his life on the line to fight for freedom and democracy. today, he'll say no matter how much ilike al sisi's crack down, he's better than the muslim brotherhood.
that's an attitude that until it gets sort of worked out and resolved, we're going to see egypt follow with authoritarian regime with authoritarian regime. >> at one point, you refer to the instability crowd, people who just prefer to ever stability and security, despite the freedoms they're giving up. >> we can't view them contemptuously. this character is no couch party sell out. he fought and risked his family's livelihood to change the regime. the fact that he has given up on his revolutionary ideals for now and a grudging acceptance of al sisi and military rule structural problems need to be addressed before to go after the luxuries of
freedom. >> dining the country will become more democratic. >> it's a long historical path it's going to change the relationship between the ruler and the ruled in egypt and i would wager across the arab world. >> it's a fascinating book about a fascinating country and raises questions that needs to be asked about what's going on in the whole middle east after the arab spring. thanks for coming in, good luck with the book. we'll be right back. >> start with one issue education... gun control... the gap between rich and poor... job creation... climate change... tax policy... the economy... iran... healthcare... ad guests on all sides of the debate. >> this is a right we should all have... >> it's just the way it is... >> there's something seriously wrong...
>> there's been acrimony... >> the conservative ideal... >> it's an urgent need... and a host willing to ask the tough questions >> how do you explain it to yourself? and you'll get... the inside story ray suarez hosts inside story weekdays at 5 eastern only on al jazeera america >> they say no one ever successfully escaped alcatraz, for its inmates freedom was just a dream. so the irony is perfectly poetic that an art show about creativity, self-expression and freedom has opened on the former island prison. >> these works are so beautifully made, they're so resplendent, they're so colorful and appealing and attractive that i think people from all walks of life will find something compelling about them. >> chinese activist artist ai weiwei calls his alcatraz exhibit "at large" and he planed it remotely, in abstentia, his own freedom curtailed by the chinese government. ai weiwei cannot leave china he
could not escape to alcatraz. decorating the old prison factory floor... over a million lego blocks portraits of political prisoners and exiles around the world. the artist himself had once sat in jail for his own outspokenness, he knows what it feels like. cell block "a" has become the installation "stay tuned" - an invitation to sit behind bars and listen to poetry and music composed by political prisoners... echoes of a tibetan song of freedom inside what was once america's most infamous prison.
>> violence against women is a serious problem across the world. according to the statistics with a government and police force immersed in corruption and culture of impunity, the u.n. lists mexico among the 20 worst countries for violence against women. great to have you with us. violence in mexico has been pandemic for years, tens of
thousands killed by the cartels. in that context, how do we know that there is a more serious problem when it comes to women. >> the problem with women has always been a problem, but with more endemic violence, women have been caught into that too. there's domestic partners who may account for a third or a half of the men who attack these women, but then the rest is probably related to the wider system of criminality which exists, so these women, for instance could be used as in human trafficking and don't make their final -- or they're used up. they're used by drug gangs and after a while no longer useful and chopped up and thrown into the sewage canal. >> you describe the case of a woman married to a police officer, her mother said that she was subjected to bottommistic abuse for years and
the marriage, she is found dead, owl bruised an a bed and the police call it a suicide and the husband ends up being promoted as a police officer. you hear of cases like that and think how could this possibly be. you point out that most of the women who are victims of family side of vulnerable women. >> most cases of these women are not very educated or wealthy and don't have the resources to pursue. >> the family don't have the resource to say pursue the criminals and the mexican legal system is doing very little. >> exactly. >> if you look at the numbers, it's shocking that only 24% of murders against women are investigated. less than 2% being actually sentenced.
why that is happening? >> part is that the judicial system is dysfunctional anyway. when you look at the statistics of male homicide, the degree of prosecution is probably roughly the same. when you actually look at male homicide, there is 10 times greater incidents of cases than for women. what makes the female -- the femicide particularly troubling is there's a gender-based, sexually based element to it, so it's not just strictly one man shooting another man because he wants money or they've had a fight or the cartels are in battle. >> a misogyny endemic to the system and society. >> exactly. >> we became aware of how bad things could be for women in mexico in the 1990s, because of this explosion are busy appearances of women in juarez on the border, sometimes attribute to the drug cartels.
not clear if that is the case or not. the drug cartels are a big part of the problem but not the only problem. >> in the case of women, definitely. speaking to experts as well as the special prosecutor appointed by the government, they all said the same thing, there's a general misogyny against women and particularly in a working class situation, a woman doesn't have the resources or self confidence to confront it. an example, i met the parents of the woman who was married to the policeman who beat her for two years. the family said we can't go to the authorities, because he's a policeman, so they did nothing. >> the special prosecutor also told you that she hadn't prosecuted one case in 2014. it begs the question, how does
it possibly happen it. >> begs the question why have 70,000, maybe 100,000 people been killed over the last eight years in drug violence. the judicial system doesn't work. it's a failed state in that reward. you know, you'd have to kind of blow up the institution and start it from scratch. corruption is so endemic and patronage so endemic. the women's position in society is so low. >> in 2007, the president moved for legislation to help women. it hasn't helped? >> it hasn't. you look at the figures, it hasn't. according to the figures, they are pretty stable. >> this is a horrible situation. >> it's a horrible situation. >> not getting terribly worse, but it's a horrible situation. >> right. >> the president of mexico hasn't spoken out bit. he was the govern of the state
of mexico where mexico city is and that number of murders there was higher than it was in juarez. >> and it continues to be. when he first the --was the govern of that state, the figures were explosive. >> why aren't they speaking out? >> i think it isn't a priority for this government. i think it goes back to the role of women in that society. i want to add, because i don't want to be seen as mexico bashing, there are 20 our countries that are bad. it's a problem for women in many countries, not explicitly mexico, but is very, very shocking. >> it's an alarming piece that you wrote, raising a big issue for one of our most important allies and neighbors. pleasure to have you with us thanks. >> thank you very much. >> mountain gorillas facing extinction.
state for people who smoke from 18-69, the average age of death for smokers. they factored in the cost of cigarettes, what you could ever earned if you invested that money, health choir costs and higher insurance rates. the average cost varies significantly in part because a pack that goes for $5.25 will run you $12.85 in new york. south car cline in a is the cheapest place, but will still cost $1.1 million. west virginia is second, followed closely by kentucky mississippi and georgia. the most expensive, alaska at more than $2 million. the northeast fills out the top knife with connecticut, new york, massachusetts and rhode island. the usda reported it will cost a quarter million dollars to raise a baby born last year to the age of 18. the cost of smoking in alaska eight times more. while smokers shell out big bucks, they make an average of
17.5% less than non-smokers. >> coming up, the desperate and deadly efforts to save mountain >> al jazeera america presents a breakthrough television event. borderland. six strangers. >> let's just send them back to mexico. >> experience illegal immigration up close and personal. >> it's overwhelming to see this many people that have perished. >> lost lives are relived. >> all of these people shouldn't be dead. >> will there differences bring them together or tear them apart? >> the only way to find out is to see it yourselves. >> which side of the fence are you on? borderland, tomorrow at 9 eastern, only on al jazeera america.
>> i think we have a problem. >> companies are playing with fire. it has driven people out of these villages. >> they could lose everything. >> the national park is the only hope this region has. >> it is now streaming on netflix. great to have you with us. it really is a very, very powerful film. it is this spectacular national park in congo, bigger than the state of delaware, it's one of the most bio diverse places in the world and it's been threatened on two fronts rebels, war and an oil and gas company. >> absolutely. this park is this amazing place, like jurassic park. there's been war there 20 years.
this is a park which is really people focused and driven to create development projects and kickstart sustainable development and with that customs stability and long term peace. >> there is tremendous violence, park rangers dedicated to protect that go park, 140 of them have died, two of the people you profile in the movie, the most high profile people were attacked after you finished filming. >> it's incredibly dangerous. that just goes to show you how very brave the rangers are, that every day, they get up knowing it could be their last. that is very humbling, that people will risk their lives for something bigger than themselves for all of with us, because this is an important part of our planet. if it falls to the business interests, if this place falls what is safe on four planet that can be protect?
what is safe from human greed. >> the violence side has died down since you stopped filming but the issue with the oil and goo company, despite denials they say they are not moving forward with any projects there, there are still issues. >> well, i mean currently, so building company's a british oil company, they have an american board. they've been exploring there for a number of years, in june made an announcement they were going to halt, but they are analyzing the results of the exploration and ready to come back in if they're positive. >> this is a world heritage site. why would they be allowed to drill? >> why would any responsible company explore for oil in a world heritage site? that is something you need to ask them. i personally think it's disgraceful. >> mountedden gorillas the main focus of the movie. the wildlife foundation said they are extremely endangered,
live in small habitats in that area and congo, rwanda. unbelievable animals. they are human-like, the affection they show, are things getting better for them? >> well, i mean, you said they are endangered, only 880 left in the world there are probably more people in this building. their population happen improving due to the dedication of the rangers in the national park and the you haven't are parks where they live. >> what kind of threat do rangers face now the most? the head guy was shot in the stomach just a few months ago. >> well, they face a number of threats from rebels and poacher, but really the one threat to the entire integrity of this park is the illegal oil exploration that's been done. that threatens everything these guys ever risked their lives for for such a long time. >> you show some pretty clear
scenes of some pretty extreme behavior of people purportedly representing the company. >> yes, some of the stuff, you know, these are people who are supporters, contractors for the company, mercenaries and direct employees. the stuff they say, you couldn't streit it in a movie. it's unbelievable, incredibly racist comments about congolese people just incredibly greedy. serious questions about corruption, human rights abuse and links to rebel groups. we are very concerned that this company has no oversight. >> it's not just the gorillas, it's elephants, all the great animals that live in this place and that need to be helped. there is a solution? how are things moving forward to protect this park and those animals. >> our film, we believe that's a
really useful tool to protect this park, shedding light. our film is on netflix, go to our website and learn more about how to protect it. >> your attempt is to find worldwide investments that will make this park successful and sustainable. >> they are pushing this very ambitious plan about kickstarting long term economic development through hydropower tourism. rwanda brings in $500 million just from gorilla tourism. there is a potential to bring in a lot of money and with money, that stops people from joining rebel groups and that's the seed of long term stability. >> let's hope your movie is successful at bringing attention to this issue. the oscar-nominated film is available on netflix. the conversation continues on
our website, al jazeera/considerthis, also on facebook and twitter. you can tweet me. we'll see you next time. >> joint military exercises between united states and south korea are regular occurrences. this one, codenamed max thunder - took place in november at the kunsan air force base 150 miles south of seoul... >> this type of exercise takes place every year but for the north korean government they consider this a provoc